As I noted the other day, I and a bunch of fellow progressive media folks sat down with Speaker Pelosi in her offices to ask some questions.

I had put a call out for questions at ask the Speaker, and I got a great response both at The Seminal and on Reddit, including a very well organized push to get me to ask about the DREAM Act. I did not get a chance to ask a question this morning, though the Speaker did indicate she would like to do this kind of thing again, perhaps more regularly. However, the conversation was interesting. Below are some quotes and observations. You can listen to and read the entire transcript over here.

First, I clearly got the sense (not that this wasn’t my feeling before) that Pelosi is very much focused on the big picture. She talked a lot about it being a “completely different world” now that a Democrat, and specifically Obama, is in the White House. She talked less about specific bills or timelines, though she had a good grasp on policy. This makes sense. Her job is to manage her caucus and set priorities. As long as her caucus is well managed and knows what to do, legislation can be more effectively developed through the committee process. Indeed, at one point she specifically begged off being the conduit through which all House communication flows, saying, “Another [rumor] said that I said to the White House, ‘You can’t talk to any members unless you talk to me first.’ I don’t have that kind of time, nor do I have the interest.”

She also had a very interesting point on the cram down bankruptcy legislation, which would allow bankruptcy judges to reduce mortgage payments to match current home values, rather than the inflated values of the housing bubble era, which is in danger of not passing or being watered down under pressure from banks (more here):

The concerns that I hear from my members on how we go forward on this, and we will go forward on it, is not actually what is in the bankruptcy bill, it is, “What is the bankruptcy bill a part of?” Our members are not saying “I’m not going to vote for this because of the bank.” The banks are the least popular, I mean they are one of the worst brands in America. They got us into this fix, they’ve been given tens of billions of dollars each in bailout money, and what are they doing? Giving out bonuses to their, what $18 billion in bonuses from people who have gotten TARP funds? So they don’t have a big reputation on Capitol Hill right at this time.

The concern that members have is the following: In their districts, people are really suffering. Mortgage foreclosure rates are going up, the value of the homes are going down, the uncertainty about people staying in their homes is intense. And members are saying, we don’t wanna just go home and say, “Good news, you can declare bankruptcy.” What they’re saying is give us a fuller picture, so that we can go home as saying, “This is what is happening on the mortgage foreclosure…This is what is happening to help people stay in their homes. This is the incentives that are given to lenders to negotiate. This is the fairness that we want to see in any forbearance.”

And I think when we have that picture in place for members, then the housing bill, which has many other features other than the bankruptcy bill, will go forward.

It’s a good point. The devil is still in the details, though. How much incentive, if any, are we going to give banks to renegotiate? I’m not sure there should be much given, seeing as how that banks were the ones taking the crazy risks. However, Pelosi makes a good tactical point. It will be better to send Members back to their districts with a full housing plan in place. Let’s just hope progressive mortgage renegotiation is part of that plan.

To touch on other points of policy, it seems energy is more of a priority than health care for Pelosi, as Ezra Klein relates:

This much, I think, was clear: Pelosi is focused on energy legislation She named energy policy as this Congress’s “flagship” priority. Cap and trade, she promised, would come to the floor this year, in a bill that she hoped would include not only carbon pricing but heavy investment in renewables and a reform of the energy grid. “I’d like to see it as one bill,” she said. “That would show the integrity of it: How each piece relates to the other.”

There was less evident interest in health care reform. Pelosi pointedly did not say that a bill would pass this year. “Cap and trade,” she predicted, “will be out of committee by May. Health care is bigger ticket.”

This reflects a concern of mine and others. President Obama has clearly stated that health care “cannot wait another year.” Senator Baucus, Chairman of the Finance Committee, released a detailed white paper on his vision for health care reform months ago. Baucus and Senator Kennedy co-authored an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal pushing for health care reform this year. And both committees (Finance and HELP) are rumored to be working on bills.

Clearly, the Senate and the President are focused on health care. We have yet to see the same action on the House side. We do have some outspoken proponents in the House (Pete Stark, Henry Waxman, Charlie Rangel), but so far, not much in the way of details or bills. As noted above, Pelosi is in more of the 10,000-feet-up position, so the committee process will be important here. Still, would be nice to see the House Chairs laying down some markers.

One last thing she said on Republicans:

I always believe that people vote in what they believe in…What you have to know about these Republicans is they do not believe in what we are talking about here, about an economy where the prosperity is shared by many more Americans and not just the few. Where we have access to health care for all, universal, as a right not a privilege. Because, they think that any advance in making that universal reduces private insurance. You see this in this Billy Kristol memo that is going around. That’s a reflection of what they believe. So I think that while people talk about the politics of Washington, inter-party bickering, and non-partisan, they believe what they are voting for.

One of the strategies Republicans may use (at least according to Matt Bai), is to split House Democrats from President Obama. I’m not sure it’ll happen under Pelosi. She clearly is only taking responsibility for the House (and taking a few pot shots at the Senate), but she seems to be listening to her more conservative Members. It’s a fine line, because clearly I don’t want this country run by Blue Dogs. Still, seeing as they are no longer a swing voting bloc in the House, I think we’ll see a House that’s more liberal than Obama or the Senate without splitting the party. At least I hope so…

Those were my observations from the conversation, but check out the transcript in the link above and let me know what you see. And thanks again for the questions. At the next meeting, I hope to have a chance to ask them.

WHAT'S NEXT?

Subscribe via RSS or Email  ::     ::  Leave a comment

Bookmark to: